Ajay Gope @ Kanhaiya Gope vs The State Of Jharkhand ..... Opp. Party
2026 Latest Caselaw 1989 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Ajay Gope @ Kanhaiya Gope vs The State Of Jharkhand ..... Opp. Party on 16 March, 2026

Author: Rajesh Kumar

Bench: Rajesh Kumar

                                                       2026:JHHC:6900

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    B.A No.2015 of 2026

       Ajay Gope @ Kanhaiya Gope, aged about - 27 years, Son
       of - Raghunath Gope, Resident of - Cross Road No.-03,
       Jawaharnagar, Road No.-14, P.O & P.S. - Azad Nagar,
       Jamshedpur, District - East Singhbhum (Jharkhand).
                                           ......     Petitioner
                            Versus
       The State of Jharkhand                      .....        Opp. Party
                                ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, A.P.P

---------

02/Dated: 16th March, 2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The applicant, who is in custody since 19.09.2025, has approached this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with Chandil P.S. Case No.0155 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 318(4)/ 341(2)/ 336(3)/ 340(2)/ 274/ 275/ 338 of the BNS, 2023, Sections 47a/ 47d/ 47f/ 52(a) of the Excise Act and Sections 25(1-B)(a)/ 26/ 35 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of learned SDJM, Chandil.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that complete set of F.I.R along with its enclosures have been annexed with the present bail application and there is no suppression on his/ her part.

Innocence of the applicant has been claimed and undertaking has been given for participation in the trial. It has been submitted that the seizure is not proper. It has further been submitted that the investigation is complete. On the above basis, prayer for bail has been made.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail stating that there is recovery of huge quantity of liquor and further, there is recovery of arms also.

5. Considering the recovery, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the applicant is, hereby, rejected.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) 16th March, 2026 Chandan/-

Uploaded on 16.03.2026